As I have said before, one reason I bought the car was long term reliability, after 30 odd years of diesel ownership I want long term reliability. Not boy racer turbo boosted traffic light take offs with a highly stressed engine. The current engine is plenty powerful enough if you know how and when to use it. Honda engines are some of the best around, they just have the majority of their power at the top half of the rev range. It is a choice whether you use it or not.

As I have said before, one reason I bought the car was long term reliability, after 30 odd years of diesel ownership I want long term reliability. Not boy racer turbo boosted traffic light take offs with a highly stressed engine. The current engine is plenty powerful enough if you know how and when to use it. Honda engines are some of the best around, they just have the majority of their power at the top half of the rev range. It is a choice whether you use it or not.

I agree with that. The Mk 3 has plenty of power and I would not want to sacrifice any reliability for more power. But I would trust Honda not to introduce a less reliable engine, especially given its worldwide pedigree.

Just because it is a turbo doesn't mean it has to be driven like a boy racer. As you said, it is a choice whether you use the power or not.

Likely I will order a mk3 before the end of the year. I strongly hope that the 1.0t will be avaiable... If you run calmly, it will drink moreorless this 1.3, but if you push the right pedal it will run like a good 1.8 naturally aspirated.

Usually, a modern 1.2 turbocharged petrol engine can run like a good 1.6-1.8 Naturally Aspirated old engine (with a similiar conspumption), but driving normally it will consume like a 1.3-1.4 N.A.IMHO an engine that can run normally with a low consumption but can also run fast (even if with an high consumption) is a good engine, better than engines with a low consumption but also with low power and torque.

I would like to know where these incredible mpg figures come from and how they are allowed to claim them. BMW i8 and Misubishi PHEV can both claim 135mpg + but after 15 to 20 miles when battery is flat the consumption is no better than 30mpg. Same with small turbo, if you use the power you burn the fuel (still can't get away from 14:1 air / fuel mix). Turbo will give more torque at lower revs, and help reduce pumping losses, but you 'don't get owt for nowt'

I would like to know where these incredible mpg figures come from and how they are allowed to claim them. BMW i8 and Misubishi PHEV can both claim 135mpg

Blame the rather short official test cycle. The US figures are more representative from a more thorough test procedure especially if you ignore the gallon conversion factor.

Hybrid emissions are not measured at an MOT either, just because it's operating mode can't always be predetermined.

My northern next door neighbour has an i8 and several of my London neighbours have plug-ins in our garage - none of them are ever hooked up. It must be the tax advantages that appeal.

Facelift Mk3 might get the new engine, hoping that we'll get the 1.5 iVTEC + i-DCD hybrid gearbox that's just been put in the Jazz's cousin the Freed, and the Japanese version of the Honda Jade (110kW & 203 Nm), but I don't think that Swindon is making this engine/gearbox right now.-- TG